Load up, load up, load up with rubber bullets.

As I posted above in this case it would be considered Sabotage.

If a protest is non-violent, it's usually not hard to deal with it.

These folks in Oakland were anything but non-violent.

Black blocs (and other structures like them) are heavily susceptible to mob mentalities and the people that join them are occasionally.... morons. Good intentioned morons, but morons nonetheless.

In theory, black bloc's work. In theory, they do not start any aggression with authorities. Theory doesn't always pan out.

The problem is that one nervous, twitchy kid on either side (an inexperienced police or protester for example) can turn a minor conflict into a huge disaster. Very rarely this is intentionally provoked - but it can happen. It only takes one.

Personally, I don't see the logic in protesting shipping lines. And provoking an assault is self-defeating (but if a police officer got nervous and 'twitched' it's a different story. Understandable, but a different story.)

Still, the tactics seem to be over the top for the situation. I really think someone on one of the sides got a little excited and acted before anyone else in the group could stop him. But, without actually being there we'll never know exactly what happened, because the protesters will keep pointing fingers at the police and the police will keep blaming the protesters. I think "truth" really is hopeless in this case.

Police fire rubber bullets at anti-abortion protesters in Oakland.

Nah. Doesn't work.

They possibly shouldn't have used rubber bullets. These protestors are breaking the law and should be arrested and put in Jail. I think the threat of 30 years would make some of them stop.

whoa...Darth Vadar?

Funny how everybody wants to ignore the poster who brought up the treason and sedition act. I guess you don't want face reality.

Rubber bullets and bean bags are commonly accepted crowd control measures. If you don't want to get hit with one, don't hang in mobs that require their use. I for one am glad to see police using the tools available to do the job.

I'm sorry but you don't get to break the law just because you feel like you have a political agenda.

Posting pictures meant to inflame, or make me realize some sort of sympathy for criminals doesn't cut it in a logical and reasonal debate.

If you don't like it when police use non lethal means to enforce the law, don't break it.

Case closed. End of story

Amen. This post is right on. Not only should rubber bullets have been used but all these protestors should have been arrested in violation of said law.

Huh? You advocate people getting shot for not obeying a police order? That's scary. Read the article again. At least one person was shot in the back. A couple of employees of the shipping line were also shot.

Regarding the violence, the article said:

Police, in the line of fire there reacted in the best way they know how. You've got some pretty violent people there, those fellows who put on black masks and picked up big rocks. One guy took a slab of concrete and threw it at one of the officers," he told Reuters.

That doesn�t sound like a riot to me. Beat the sheet out of the guy that threw the concrete. DON'T SHOOT INTO A CROWD. Even with rubber (actually, they were shooting wooden dowels and bean bags) bullets. That's what they do in China, Nazi Germany, etc. Jeebus. Again - what the friggin helll is wrong with you people?

Nice inflammatory post. Too bad the Cinese and Nazis didn't screw arouind, they used real bullets.

Again the use of non lethal crowd control measures is a perfectly legitimate means of dispersement. These are issued to police department all over the country and are generally considered safer, more effective and more humane then tear gas or Water cannons. (or a 9mm for that matter)

Don't like it? Stay Home.

Why not just arrest these people? They are breaking the law and should be arrested and put away for the Maximum. The are breaking the Law as per TITLE 18 CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I, CHAPTER 105 - SABOTAGE.

Going in an and arresting individual protesters is very dangerouis for the police because they are then surrounded by other potesters. Even if the other protesters mean the police no harm, the officers on the ground have no way of knowing that. Rather then escaliting an elaready dangerous situation, its more practical and safer for everyone involved to disperse the crowd through the above mentioned measures.

What were to happen if the police went into a crowd to arrest 1 person, and that persons friend came up from behind and hit him with a rock, or worse yet, grabbed his gun? Thats why they call it crowd control.

Because you run smack into the First Amendment. Even if a law is on the books, I'd prefer to err on the side of not enforcing it when the question of free speech is involved. Now, if one of these people had actually sabotaged something, that would be a different matter. But based on what they did, you keep the legal sledge hammer locked away even if dispersing them was appropriate.

Don't forget, one day it may be you out there protesting. You would be amazed at how much is illegal. Prosecutorial restraint is a good thing.

Agreed.

You do not have 1st amendment rights when operating a protest outside a permitted area and interfering with interstate commerce (also in the consitution) as well as interfering with a US military action. (also in the constitution, known as treason. Article 3 Section 3)

I KNEW you'd pop in here, and a good thing.
NOW case is closed, right, noodly?

This reminds me when I used to babysit my nieces. The younger one would try and try to tick off the older one to the point were the older one would hit her. Then she would run to me, act all innocent and claim her sister was a bully to get her in trouble, and make her look bad.

Didn't buy it then, don't buy it now.

You sleep in the bed you make.

Glad you liked it (my post, that is).

No, I won't stay home. It's my duty to protest a criminal, barbaric and insane act committed by my country (Iraq invasion). I LOVE America - I just hate what we do sometimes.

And you have every right to protest. What you don't have the right to do is break the law while you protest.


You and I will never see eye to eye on ths war, and I support your right to exercise your constitional right, but there are limits placed on your rights, namely the minute they infringe upon the rights of others.

Actually, in China they fire blanks at protestors - over several days - then one day, after the protestors stop fleeing, they use real bullets.